John, please don't post here if you are looking to bait arguments, No one has criticized you or your skiing,I love to ski the whole mountain, this ski is for soft snow and powder. I love to rip on my LTD's when there is nothing fresh. I am merely pointing out you are comparing two very diiferent types of skis for two very different types of skiing and missing the components of stability given the conditions or intended use. The intended use and function of the ski has to be considered. I believe you have missed the fact that the stability in soft snow and powder is also provided by a wide board underfoot, the flex pattern, torsional stability, not just length; and very importantly placement of binding; Stability and ease is also a function of the ski design including tip and tail In this case, the longer turned up tip effectively aids in breaking crud, helping with float and with uneven pitched or chopped terrain. The tail is used as the ski does not always stay on top of soft snow, so it does make contact at times but also allows a clean release allowing the skier to make easier turns at varied radius' using any technique for any turn size ot shape. Turning those added 3 inches in total is not noticeable. Don't confuse lthe total ength of ski with height of ski. The 183 may be 6' but is actually about 5' 10" tall. I am 6' 170, the ski is perfect length. Another example is the 173 directional twin Shaman where the total surface area of the ski makes it very stable in powder and crud and super quick in the trees. It can be lacking in fore/aft stability at speed for 6' footers (Ben would argue this) but for the intended use, it's a blast.
Home
Login
Register